Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Yup

That really is how it is, no? Mitt looks pretty good when one looks at the resumés and the "whole man" aspect of the available candidates, especially when it comes to intangibles like character. So just what IS it about Romney that's so damned off-putting? I'll freely admit to leaning more towards Newt of late but that doesn't mean I'll actually vote for him when the primary rolls around. I just might come to my senses and vote for Romney, given the "electability" thang. The MAIN objective is to send the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue packing and conventional wisdom sez Romney's our best bet. But sometimes conventional wisdom isn't either one... conventional or wisdom.

Check out Romney on Wikipedia and I think you'll be surprised. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_RomneyHe once rushed to defend a couple of missionary girls from being harassed by 20 French rugby players. He was declared dead after a car crash. He is a dedicated and "centered" person who has his values straight and he sure has fixed a lot of things.

My mom (who grew up in Michigan) adored his dad, who also had a fascinating life.

Newt, on the other hand, has a combative wit but I don't know if he understands the world outside the brain as well as someone like Mitt.

I am just now coming around to Romney. I hadn't been serious about him before.

Romney just seems too much like the current occupant of the WH with many of the views he holds.

He makes me think of Edwards with a little r next to his name.

Newt has his issues as well, but so much of the "horror" of his past doesn't really look much different than other people who have been in the WH with the exception of him being in a different party.

Romney just looks fake. He doesn't come off as genuine, at least to me.

Newt can lead, as he demonstrated as Speaker. Romney lead by going along with the liberal state he was governor.

I'm really bummed about Cain, but he is done. I don't trust the stories coming out about him and his sexuality, but there are enough of these bimbos to make it seem like he is a Clinton type of sexual predator, and leaves you wondering if there is yet more to come.

I don't buy the electability crap. If the candidate debates Duh One either will look to have a firmer grasp of the issues. That makes them electable. Newt has some baggage, but it is a while ago, and he seems to have learned or matured.

With either of them, we will still be getting someone who will slow the slide to toward socialism, but won't be doing anything to help reverse it. Sadly, that probably makes them electable to far too many people as well.

Romney is very slick - and that can be off-putting. I don't think he's had everything handed to him on a silver platter however the man does seem able to make gold from thin air. And there is something to be said for that given our current situation as a country.

Gingrich does have all that baggage - and the liberals will beat him with it every chance they get even if some of it is 20 years old. With Gingrich it will be all about character.

I'm getting calls at home everyday from "Newt 2012". It's just too soon for me to make that decision.

Either way - I will once again likely be forced to vote against the other guy rather than cast my vote for the candidate of my choice.

Moogie: You just saved me the trouble of writing seven specific responses. Thank ya. OTOH... that "electability" thang is real, Anon. It's the Independents that decide our presidential elections and those people will NOT vote for the fringe-right candidates like Paul, Bachmann, and, to a lesser extent, Perry.